Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Vesiylioikeus 9.11.1990 188/1990 AI generated

Administrative court dismisses sand and gravel extraction permit due to groundwater quality risks on protected areas.

Case Number Vesiylioikeus 9.11.1990 188/1990
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Administrative Court of Finland dismissed the applicant's request to extract sand and gravel from a critical groundwater area. The court found that extraction four to eight meters below the water table would cause significant groundwater quality deterioration, especially since the water had already surfaced due to prior mining. Consequently, the water authority's original permit was annulled, and the application was rejected to protect the aquifer.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

VesiL 1 luku 18 §; VesiL 1 luku 22 §: The court established that extracting sand and gravel from a critical groundwater area is prohibited when such activity poses a substantial risk of degrading groundwater quality, particularly where the water table is already compromised.

Keywords

AI generated
groundwater quality protection critical groundwater area sand and gravel extraction water authority permit aquifer depletion risk administrative court review environmental impact assessment

Cited Legislation

AI generated
VesiL 1 luku 18 §
VesiL 1 luku 22 §

Cited Case Law

AI generated
KHO 1986-A-II-104
KHO T:3860, A:3.10.1986
KHO T:2188, A:7.1.1987
KHO T:1220, A:3.4.1987
VYO T:179/1989, A:16.10.1989
VYO T:183/1989, A:18.10.1989
AI generated
ECLI:FI:KHO:2020:62
HFD:2020:62
admin_1989_water-superior__179
Administrative court dismissed mining permit due to significant groundwater damage outweighing benefits.
kho-precedent_2015_45
Court dismisses appeal as environmental permit granted where pollution risk is negligible despite groundwater location.
admin_2014_helsinki__198
Planning permission denied for warehouse on groundwater protection area due to lack of design necessity under planning act.
kho-other_2016_3456
Supreme Administrative Court dismisses appeal; soil extraction on geological formation violates nature protection law.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Hakemuksessa tarkoitettu hiekka- ja soraesiintymä sijaitsi

tärkeällä pohjavesialueella, jolla kunnan oli tarkoitus suorittaa

tutkimuksia pohjavedenottoalueen laajentamiseksi. Suunniteltu

hiekan ja soran ottaminen tapahtuisi 4-8 metriin saakka

pohjavesipinnan alapuolelle. Alueella oli jo otettu hiekkaa

ja soraa niin paljon, että pohjavesi oli tullut näkyviin. Jatkuva

ottaminen pohjavesipinnan alapuolelta voisi johtaa pohjaveden

laadun olennaiseen huononemiseen. Vesioikeuden luvan

myöntävä päätös kumottiin ja hakemus hylättiin.

VesiL 1 luku:18 §

VesiL 1 luku 22 §

KHO: 1986-A-II-104

KHO:n päätös T:3860, A:3.10.1986

KHO:n päätös T:2188, A:7.1.1987

KHO:n päätös T:1220, A:3.4.1987

VYO:n päätös T:179/1989, A:16.10.1989

VYO:n päätös T:183/1989, A:18.10.1989

Vihervuori: Maa-ainesten ottaminen ja suojelu (1984)

s. 472-475

Kuusiniemi: Maa-ainesten otto ja pohjaveden suojelu,

Maanmittaus nro 2/1988 s.14-16

Lainvoimainen